The first Spider-Man was fine until he became Spider-Man then it was slow roll downhill. The second one was far batter. A lot of that goes to Alfred Molina , the guy knocks it out of the park in everything he does.

Yep, a good movie, no matter the genre, should be about story and character first. The action builds off of that. The problem with a vast majority of movies today (about 95%) id that they go for the glitz and glamour first, then the action and try to jam a story into characters who haven't been fleshed out.

Spiderman 2 was better, but spiderman 1 rejuvenated superhero movies

People thought darkness was the answer, but quality is the answer. That's why the Nolan trilogy, spiderman 1 and 2 and avengers have been successful

Iron man 2 was every bit as bright and action packed as the avengers but was an average movie. Why? Bad quality. Movie executives always seem to believe the success is in the style as opposed to the quality

It was a bad movie also because they crammed way too much information into one movie at the expense of having a cohesive story. It was a very non Jon Favreau kind of movie. I imagine he got a lot of useless input from studio suits suring production. There's a reason him and the studio had a mutual disinterest in him taking the helm on the third one.

You're right about Spider-Man it did fire everyone up. I was just going on about it being not that great. But it definitely did spark interest in the comic book movie again.

It was a bad movie also because they crammed way too much information into one movie at the expense of having a cohesive story. It was a very non Jon Favreau kind of movie. I imagine he got a lot of useless input from studio suits suring production. There's a reason him and the studio had a mutual disinterest in him taking the helm on the third one.

You're right about Spider-Man it did fire everyone up. I was just going on about it being not that great. But it definitely did spark interest in the comic book movie again.

From what I've read it was actually the studio forcing him to add avengers lead ins throughout the movie. Jon actually wasn't in favor of having a lot of avengers pieces in the film.

By far the best comic book movie Brandon Routh has appeared in, it'd be convenient to say director Edgar Wright's adaptation of the Bryan Lee O'Malley graphic novels was groundbreaking in the way "Sin City" and "300" were (more on that in a few), but we're not sure Hollywood will be building on the "Scott Pilgrim" lot again any time soon. So we'll say this - the film's visual bridging of comic books and cinema was waaay cooler than Ang Lee's "Hulk". That it also marries film to video game play is just gravy.

The film's hard-to-describe, therefore even-harder-to-market sensibilities contributed heavily to a disappointing theatrical box office run, though we suspect these same sensibilities are going to help garner it eventual cult status.

While its overall inventiveness is what stands out, "Scott Pilgrim" succeeds mostly because it's one of the more purely genial and simply charming movies aimed towards teen and younger adult crowds released in who knows when. Smart and sarcastic without being cynical, its feel-good nature is infectious and inviting, which makes it doubly ironic that it probably failed commercially because of a perceived lack of accessibility.

Stand-Out Scene:

Although its quirks are apparent from the opening seconds, for those who didn't read the source material it's not until the first "League of evil exes" video game fight scene/Bollywood musical number with Matthew Patel that the film really shows its unique hand. The "WTF" reaction from Anna Kendrick (as Scott's sister Stacey) to the action probably mirrored the response of many unprepared moviegoers. It's at this point that you're either in or you're out, and we suspect most people who give it a fair shot probably deal themselves in.

Though Sam Raimi's first Spider-Man film might be showing its age (for reasons even beyond the Macy Gray scene) and the third film has been largely reviled since its release for an excess of villains and dance numbers, the second film is not only the strongest of the three, it's one of the most critically acclaimed comic book movies of all time.

And it's not hard to see why: Ably capturing the patented Spider-Man formula of good-natured fun and genuine emotion, Spider-Man 2 presents a both sympathetic and intimidating villain in Alfred Molina's Doctor Octopus, and the best outing for Tobey Maguire in the lead role. It also includes the most distinct Raimi-esque touches, in the scene where Doc Ock's tentacles run rampant at a hospital and the funniest Bruce Campbell cameo in the trilogy.

Stand-Out Scene:

Spider-Man single-handedly stops a runaway train and saves everyone on board, though at the cost of his mask and, seemingly, his identity. But instead of snapping a picture, the passengers -- moved to see how young Spider-Man is -- agree to keep the secret to themselves.

Almost lost in the wash between the triumph of Christopher Nolan's first two Batman epics (more on those later) and the stink of the two near franchise-killing Joel Schumacher entries is the fact that Tim Burton's first effort in '89 is a darn good movie and was the box office phenomena of its day.

Though now dated slightly by the back-lot exterior sets, the by-now way too familiar Danny Elfman score, and the heavy-handed inclusion of Prince songs (what the hell was that about?), Michael Keaton's Batman was a surprising but highly credible one, and Jack Nicholson's Joker was a sensation.

And the film had a high bar to clear in its day. True-blue comic book fans were still newly basking in the glow of the original publication of perhaps the two definitive contemporary Batman stories, Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" (1986) and Alan Moore's "The Killing Joke" (1988).

Stand-Out Scene:

Nicholson's presumably improvisational moment of making peculiar random noises to no one in particular before cracking up in the character's famous maniacal cackle.

If there is a rule that sequels of films adapted from other media play better than the original, "X2" may be the movie that defines the rule. With all the origin stories, introductions of beloved characters, and establishment of the "mutant" premise out of the way, the film hit the ground running from its very first reel, relying on great moments from the comic books for inspiration, but without paying obvious, heavy-handed homage to them.

Stand-Out Scene:

Wolverine popping his claws and cutting loose on Stryker's solders during their attack on the Xavier Institute. On top of a rousing, well-choreographed action scene, it was the big screen moment hardcore X-Men fans waited decades to see.

Honorable mentions go to Magneto's inventive escape from his plastic prison cell, as well as the opening sequence involving Nightcrawler infiltrating the White House, which is possibly the best opening to an action movie ever.

What Makes It Great: "300" makes the list mainly in observance of the "groundbreaking" rule. Aside from a solid script based on a terrific graphic novel by Frank Miller, a star-making performance by Gerard Butler, "300" will be remembered for its innovative use of green screen technology to a create an arresting new wholly virtual landscape that will likely prove highly influential in the genre over the next several years.

Sure, you might argue that the 2005 green screen panel-for-panel recreation of that other Frank Miller graphic novel "Sin City" came before "300", as did films like 2004's "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow", but the Zack Snyder-directed epic was the first nearly all-CGI box office hit, scoring over $450 million at theaters worldwide.

Stand-Out Scene:

What, you were expecting us to say anything other than the defeat of the 300? Even though you know how the battle will end, the spectacle and the emotion of Leonidas' final assault hits deeply on a visceral level, making it a satisfying conclusion to the story, as well as an amazing four minutes of film. It also sets up a very satisfying epilogue. A sequel/prequel "Battle of Artemisia" is in development, which will only add to the film's legacy if and when it comes to pass.

What Makes It Great: The "groundbreaking" rule applies here again, which is why this one gets the nod over 1980's "Superman II", which may have been a hair more fun.

"Superman" was arguably the first true modern comic book movie adaptation, and holds a special place in the hearts of an entire generation of moviegoers, not to mention the writers, artists, directors, and executives shaping Superman's adventures in various media today. While the special effects are of course now clunky by contemporary standards, the John Williams score remains an all-time classic, and the story and performances are solid and endearing.

Stand-Out Scene:

The helicopter rescue of Lois Lane atop the Daily Planet building. In a rare moment of movie harmony, the Metropolis bystanders' reaction to seeing Superman in action for the first time matched perfectly with the response from modern moviegoers - pure awe and joy.

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (2012)

Studio: Sony. Director: Marc Webb. Stars: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone

What Makes It Great:

When it originally debuted on this list, it knocked Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man 2" out of the Top 10 entirely. That may have seemed a little harsh at the time, but Raimi's "Spider-Mans" already weren't aging very well and Marc Webb's "Amazing Spider-Man" just accelerated the process to critical mass.

"Amazing" is superior to the original three Spidey features in every conceivable way - better lead actors, better supporting actors, better action and special effects, and yes, better origin story.

Fans complaining that 10 years was too soon to retell the origin might have to reevaluate when they realize "Amazing" tells a much better origin story. In fact, we here at Newsarama think "Amazing" tells the best Spider-Man origin story ever, and yes, we're including the comic books too [ducks, runs for cover.]

The retelling/remixing of origins is a tried and true comic book tradition. Not sure why "Amazing" is any different.

"Amazing Spider-Man" is cool, contemporary, and accessible. It gives comic book fans exactly what they want (the best-realized Spider-Man action yet, a path to more Spidey films in the future) and probably what they didn't know they needed (Garfield and Stone frankly mop the floor with Maguire and Dunst).

Stand-Out Scene:

Anything with Garfield and Stone together. Their chemistry is evident and Stone continues to emerge as one of the brightest, most dynamic and appealing young stars of her generation.

It would be easy to just say "Robert Downey Jr." and leave it at that. But that wouldn't be fair to the film's secret weapon, director Jon Favreau.

Having already demonstrated considerable box office savvy with the holiday hit "Elf", which appealed to adults and children equally, here Favreau takes, at best, a B-list comic book character and crafts a story and characters with mass appeal. "Iron Man" plays equally well to the hardcore male comic book reader, as it does with women, kids, and just about anyone that might not have ever read a comic book before. And he did it all while staying very faithful to the comic books.

Favreau didn't rethink the core concept in order for it to make more "sense" to non-comics fans. He knew audiences would buy into the fantastical conceit of the armor and sci-fi elements so long as its human counterpart made them want to suspend their disbelief, and in that respect Favreau came up aces with Downey Jr., which was at first an unexpected and somewhat risky choice.

Stand-Out Scene:

Its very first. Downey Jr.'s hyper-witted riffing with the army soldiers in the armored jeep right before it's attacked not only set the entire movie's pitch-perfect tone, but immediately placed the audience in the palm of its star, where he held them steady through the closing credits (and even for a moment after).

While our one-time all-time favorite "Batman Begins" got its position because it "didn't play like a comic book superhero movie", "The Avengers" once ascended to the top because it plays EXACTLY like a comic book superhero movie!

...scratch that. It plays like a comic book - that happens to be an awesome big budget movie.

This is the sub-genre ultimately (so far) realized: Bigger, bolder and more fantastic than even Hollywood standards. Crisp dialogue. Breakneck pacing. Seamless special effects (if not costumes... keep working on the Cap uniform, Disney.)

Taking hold and sprinting with the baton that began with Favreau's "Iron Man", Joss Whedon's "The Avengers" doesn't adapt anything for "mainstream" audiences. It doesn't re- or over-think its source material. Which is a more difficult task than Favreau faced because of the extreme disparate elements - a soldier, a monster, a god, and a machine - it has to integrate.

No, it's not exactly the comic book Avengers in specific detail, but it's 100% pure in spirit.

Stand-Out Scene: Oh, pretty much the entire third act - the "assembled" team battle with the invading alien hordes.

And this is maybe "The Avengers" greatest of several secret weapons. While many films in the comic book genre labor with their third acts, The Avengers revels and thrives in it, ending on such a high note it should leave most anyone with human DNA wanting for much more.

What Makes the Trilogy the New Best Comic Book Based Movie(s) of All Time:

OK, OK. This is somewhat a cheat, yes, but each film was produced, co-written and directed by same person, and tells a cohesive story that despite Christopher Nolan's claims he made decisions one film at a time, we suspect were at least mapped out in outline form from the very beginning with the intention of completing the cycle.

In other words, all three films effectively make up one big production ... and what a production it is.

Individually, it'd be perfectly understandable if a fan had a favorite comic book film other than one of these three, but considered together, is there any more impressive cinematic achievement in the category?

Perhaps in future years Joss Whedon can string together a more impressive body of "Avengers" films, but until then, Nolan's modern-day masterpiece is the standard bearer, and we suspect it will remain so for a very long time.

Stand-Out Chapter:

"Rises" will almost certainly be the biggest box office grosser, and "Dark Knight" may well live on as the consensus critical best of the bunch, but we still favor "Begins", perhaps due to the expectations-vs.-delivery factor.

"Begins" was the film that rewrote the rules for comic books/superhero movies that its sequels took to another level. Perhaps what they say about first loves simply applies here.

I disagree. I enjoyed TDKR a lot but I can't think of one thing about it in which The Avengers didn't do better.

Again, The Avengers was NOTHING like transformers to me.

I can think of several. Just a different of opinion. You've stated before your a marvel guy so naturally seeing a bunch of marvel characters on screen will get you excited and you will love the movie

I loved avengers. My issue was with the copycat climax, the wooden acting from everyone outside of Robert Downey jr, Jackson, and hiddleston

Renner was ok but he was essentially made into a robot for 75% of the movie.

Hemsworth was stone, not horrible, Evans was horrible. He only was passable in the climax. Scarlett was eye candy but useless.

To me the performances were just lacking. The action was awesome. Better than TDKR. I could write paragraphs of the issues with avengers and you could probably do the same with TDKR. My point is avengers isn't a better movie. You could say its more geared to comic book fans. Which is probably true as Whedon is a comic book fan.

We're comparing comic vs comic. The only separation really is the difference in comics which goes back to what I've said before: DC (Detective Comics) vs Marvel

Batman is the darling of DC (frankly, they don't have much else) and its geared to have what's perceived as a better story.

I completely agree, batman lends itself to being more in depth. While iron man is more superficial. Bright lights and comedic delivery

Different styles. That's why I said which movie is better depends on what you want. TDKR is for people who want something deeper that strikes certain emotions and delivers certain messages

Avengers is for those who want awesome action, a bunch of laughs, and eye candy

I loved both but batman was, is and has always been more my style

My favorite marvel character is spiderman because he's basically batman in terms of emotion and character.

Like I said when two movies are good, the better one is determined by which fits what you want

For me what it boils down to is TDKR was rewarding while avengers was fun. I have fun a lot at the movies, rarely rewarded

Begins and TDK made me care about fox, Bruce, alfred, Gordon, and the movie was filled with emotion and suspense because I cared about those characters. The last 10 min of the movie were an emotional Rollercoaster, from John Blake's sad stare, to Alfred's crying apology, to fox wanting to fix the bat, to that moment you see bruce sitting at the table, to John Blake becoming batman

No way Iron Man is more popular than Superman even if you are right about ppl liking flawed characters. Batman, Spiderman, and Superman are like the iconic american superheroes not Iron man ppl prob like the Hulk and Wolverine over Iron man.